Prescriptions for Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs have soared by more than a quarter in a year, official figures show.

Last year there were 1.7 million prescriptions for sildenafil – commonly sold as Viagra but also available under other trade names.

This was compared with 1.4 million prescriptions of the drug in 2013 and one million in 2004, according to figures from the Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC).

For sildenafil alone, prescriptions rose by 21 per cent, over the course of the year.

Prescriptions for Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs have soared by more than a quarter in a year, according to official figures

And, prescriptions of other erectile dysfunction drugs have added to the rise.

Antidepressants, which include drugs for depressive illness, generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), obsessive-compulsive disorder, and panic attacks, also saw a large increase with 57.1 million dispensed last year, up 7.2 per cent from 53.3 million in 2013.

Since 2004 the number has nearly doubled from 29 million.

Overall, more than 1.06 billion drugs were prescribed in England last year, an increase of 3.3 per cent on 2013 and a rise of 55.2 per cent on 2004, HSCIC said.

The overall net ingredient cost of prescriptions last year stood at £8.85 billion, up 2.6 per cent on 2013 and 9.6 per cent over the last decade.

While the number of prescriptions for erectile dysfunction drugs has gone up, the cost of sildenafil fell by 85.9 per cent as generic alternatives became available in 2013, HSCIC said.

The most money was spent on drugs for diabetes for the eighth year in succession, rising by £55.3 million (seven per cent) in a year to £849.1 million last year.

Atorvastatin, which helps to reduce the likelihood of heart attacks and strokes, had the greatest increase in the number of items dispensed with four million more since 2013.

More than 1.06 billion items were prescribed in England last year, an increase of 3.3 per cent on 2013 and a rise of 55.2 per cent on 2004, according to the Health and Social Care Information Centre

The pros and cons of using Viagra (related)

The report shows the average net ingredient cost per prescription item dispensed in the community has decreased by 29.4 per cent since 2004.

Of all prescription items dispensed the vast majority – 89.9 per cent (957.1 million) – were free of charge.

Three in five were for patients aged 60 and over, accounting for 51.2 per cent (£4.53 billion) of the total net ingredient cost for all prescriptions.

One in 20 was for patients aged under 16 or those in the 16 to 18 age group, and in full-time education.

The report looks at prescriptions dispensed by community pharmacists, dispensing doctors and in GP practices.

A new study has suggested men who take Viagra may be more likely to get skin cancer

Men who take Viagra may be more likely to get skin cancer, research suggests.

The medical records of 20,000 men show that those who took a particular class of erectile dysfunction drugs had an increased risk of being diagnosed with a malignant melanoma.

The researchers, from New York University, say their findings are not strong enough to call for people to stop taking the drugs.

But they called for further investigations into the medication.

The found that a class of erectile medication called phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors – of which sildenafil or Viagra, is the best known – was associated with a small increase in skin cancers.

Using Swedish medical records from 2006 to 2012, the researchers found that men who had ever received a single prescription for erectile medication were 21 per cent more likely to develop a malignant melanoma than those who had not.

But the team, whose work was published today in the respected JAMA medical journal, said they could not prove any link between the drugs and the disease.

They said they were especially cautious about their findings because the rate of skin cancer did not rise when patients took more of the drug – which they would usually expect if the medication was playing a role.

Lead author Dr Stacy Loeb said: ‘What our study results show is that groups of men who are more likely to get malignant melanoma include those with higher disposable incomes and education – men who likely can also afford more vacations in the sun – and who also have the means to buy erectile dysfunction medications, which are very expensive.

‘When used appropriately, erectile dysfunction medications are very effective and improve the quality of life for many men.’

British experts last night said that the results should be approached with care.

Professor Stephen Evans of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said: ‘The authors of this study are appropriately cautious in the interpretation of their data.

‘A key factor is exposure to sun, and the data on this – and other possible relevant factors – were not available.’

Professor Chris Chapple of the European Association of Urology, added: ‘While this is an interesting observation there is a lack of an association between dosing and incidence; the association was more noticeable in patients who had filled single prescriptions as compared to more prolonged exposure to this type of drug.

‘It’s an interesting observation, but it should not be a trigger for any change in current clinical practice relating to the use of drugs for the treatment of erectile dysfunction such as Viagra and related compounds.’

Scientists analysed the medical records of 20,000 men and found that those who took a particular class of erectile dysfunction drugs had an increased risk of being diagnosed with a malignant melanoma

1) The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

2) The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

3) The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

4) The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5) No experiment should be conducted, where there is an apriori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

6) The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

7) Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

8) The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

9) During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, if he has reached the physical or mental state, where continuation of the experiment seemed to him to be impossible.

10) During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgement required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

“Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10″, Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949.]